Rule 18. Termination of Parental Rights

(a) Petition. The Department may file a petition seeking

termination of parental rights combined with or after the filing

of a petition for adjudication of that child as a child in need of

aid. The title of the petition must clearly state that termination

of parental rights is sought. A petition for termination of

parental rights must be served as provided by CINA Rule 7(d)

and (e).

(b) Purpose of Hearing. The termination hearing is a

disposition hearing to the court on the question of whether the

parental rights to an adjudicated child in need of aid should be

terminated. Upon a showing of good cause and with adequate

notice to the parties, an adjudication hearing and a termination

hearing may be consolidated.

(c) Burden of Proof. Before the court may terminate

parental rights, the Department must prove:

(1) by clear and convincing evidence that

(A) the child has been subjected to conduct or conditions

described in AS 47.10.011 and

(i) the parent has not remedied the conduct or conditions

in the home that place the child at substantial risk of harm; or

(ii) the parent has failed, within a reasonable time, to

remedy the conduct or conditions in the home that place the

child in substantial risk so that returning the child to the parent

would place the child at substantial risk of physical or mental

injury; or

(B) a parent is incarcerated and the requirements of AS

47.10.080(o) are met; and

(2) by clear and convincing evidence that

(A) the Department has complied with the provisions of

AS 47.10.086 concerning reasonable efforts; or

(B) in the case of an Indian child, that active efforts have

been made to provide remedial services and rehabilitative

programs designed to prevent the breakup of the Indian family

and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful; and

(3) by a preponderance of the evidence that termination

of parental rights is in the best interests of the child; and

.10.086 concerning reasonable efforts; or

(B) in the case of an Indian child, that active efforts have

been made to provide remedial services and rehabilitative

programs designed to prevent the breakup of the Indian family

and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful; and

(3) by a preponderance of the evidence that termination

of parental rights is in the best interests of the child; and

(4) in the case of an Indian child, by evidence beyond a

reasonable doubt, including the testimony of qualified expert

witnesses, that continued custody of the child by the parent or

Indian custodian is likely to result in serious emotional or

physical damage to the child.

(d) Relinquishment. Notwithstanding other provisions

of this rule, the court may terminate parental rights after a

voluntary relinquishment pursuant to AS 47.10.089 and

Adoption Rule 9. In the case of an Indian child, the

relinquishment must meet the requirements set forth in 25

U.S.C. § 1913(c) and Adoption Rule 9(b) and (d).

(e) Trial. A trial on the petition to terminate parental

rights shall be held within six months after the date on which

the petition to terminate parental rights is filed, unless the court

finds that good cause is shown for a continuance. When

determining whether to grant a continuance for good cause, the

court shall take into consideration the age of the child and the

potential adverse effect that the delay may have on the child.

The court shall make written findings when granting a

continuance.

(f) Evidence. Hearsay that is not admissible under a

recognized exception to the hearsay rule is not admissible at a

trial on a petition to terminate parental rights to prove that the

child has been subjected to conduct or conditions described in

AS 47.10.011. Otherwise, hearsay may be admissible at the

trial if it is probative of a material fact, has circumstantial

guarantees of trustworthiness, and the appearing parties are

given a fair opportunity to meet it.

to the hearsay rule is not admissible at a

trial on a petition to terminate parental rights to prove that the

child has been subjected to conduct or conditions described in

AS 47.10.011. Otherwise, hearsay may be admissible at the

trial if it is probative of a material fact, has circumstantial

guarantees of trustworthiness, and the appearing parties are

given a fair opportunity to meet it.

(g) Judgment. The court shall make findings of fact and

enter an order within 90 days after the last day of trial on the

petition to terminate parental rights. The court shall commit the

child to the custody of the Department if parental rights are

terminated.

(h) Post-Termination

Reports.

If

a

permanent

placement for the child was not approved at the termination

hearing, the Department shall report to the court within 30

days on the efforts being made to recruit a permanent

placement. Thereafter, the Department shall report quarterly on

efforts being made to find a permanent placement for the child.

Copies of the Department’s reports shall not be served on a

parent whose rights have been terminated.

Note:

Chapter 64, section 54, SLA 2005 (HB 53) amended

Child in Need of Aid Rule 18 as reflected in section 5 of this

Order. The change to CINA Rule 18 is adopted for the sole

reason that the legislature has mandated the amendment. In

addition, according to section 60(e) of the Act, AS 47.10.089,

enacted in section 17, amends CINA Rule 18 by providing that

a relinquishment must be in writing, allowing for the

withdrawal of the relinquishment, allowing for the retention of

certain privileges, and authorizing a review hearing before the

entry of an adoption or legal guardianship decree.

Note:

Chapter 20 SLA 2006 (HB 408) enacted changes

relating to the standard of proof in child in need of aid

proceedings

amends CINA Rule 18 by providing that

a relinquishment must be in writing, allowing for the

withdrawal of the relinquishment, allowing for the retention of

certain privileges, and authorizing a review hearing before the

entry of an adoption or legal guardianship decree.

Note:

Chapter 20 SLA 2006 (HB 408) enacted changes

relating to the standard of proof in child in need of aid

proceedings. According to section 11 of the Act, the

amendments to AS 47.10.086(c), AS 47.10.088(a), and AS

47.10.088(b) in sections 1-3 of the Act have the effect of

amending Child in Need of Aid Rule 18 relating to the

termination of parental rights proceedings by increasing the

standard of proof concerning some elements from proof by a

preponderance of the evidence to proof by clear and

convincing evidence. The change to CINA Rule 18 is adopted

to maintain consistency between the rule and the statutes.

Cross References

CROSS REFERENCE: AS 25.23.180; AS 47.10.080 (c)(3); AS

47.10.088; 25 U.S.C. § 1912(d) and (f).